The Pusher

I had never heard of this movie before, and I'm glad I checked it out. As a native New Yorker, I love seeing the location shots from the early 60's around East Harlem, Central Park and other places. Some changes since then, but some things are the same.

The same can be said for the theme of the movie, the sad reality of drug addiction. Some things never change, though opioids are now the fashion, rather than main lining heroine. Either way, it's just as pathetic.

Both Steve Lansing and Douglas Rogers do good acting jobs as police officers who go after the pusher that's supplying young people, including Laura (Kathy Carlyle), the daughter of one and fiancée of the other.

Ms. Carlyle gives a powerful performance as she goes through the stages of withdrawal, you really feel her suffering, as she's desperate for another fix of what she started taking as "headache medicine", or so she was told.

Felice Orlando is another good actor, as the evil but charming pusher, and Sara Ammon is also very good as Maria, the nightclub dancer/junkie who falls under his spell and helps cause her kid brother's death.

There are some exciting scenes involving Lansing and Rogers, who go after Orlando, risking their lives more than once.

As so often happens, there are familiar faces from TV: John Astin (in his first film role, pre "Addams Family') and David Ford, who fans of "Dark Shadows" will recognize as Sam Evans.

Worth watching.

It's a tough look at the grimy side of New York, as the detectives of the 87th Precinct try to crack down on the drug trade.

It's based on Evan Hunter's '87th Precinct' series of novels. with the screenplay written by Harold Robbins. It's got a score by the great Raymond Scott, that varies from jazz to movie bombast -- I don't think it quite works, but you may reasonably disagree. Robert Lansing plays the same character he would in the 1961-1962 TV series, and if you look hard, you may recognize John Astin as one of the detectives in the background.

It's certainly worthy of approval of the tough realism of New York's street and worthy of your at

B-movies are sometimes envisaged as an inferior kind of films. No, it means that the production costs are not as elevated as A-movies. If a star actor gets, say, 1 million dollars for a movie, well, some films (without stars) were made with an overall expenditure of less than 1 million. Now, I don't really care about production's costs, and some B-movies are better than the more high-class ones (not this one, I must say).

The strong positive values of "The Pusher", in my opinion, are the well-defined plot, without any confusing sub-plots or blurred images and shots that let you quite uncertain about what has really happened, and the consequent linear execution of it. This is also a detrimental point, because when you reach minute 16th (of the overall 82), you will know exactly how will the narrative develop.

No thrills, consequently, but if you are a lover of the genre you will enjoy this film. I rated it 6; let's say, more precisely, 6 and a half.

For some reason, "The Pusher" sat on the shelf for two years until it was finally released to theaters. I have no idea why, as usually this means the film is terrible...but there's nothing terrible about this movie. It's excellent...and holds up well all these years later.

The story is about a particularly vicious drug dealer. Not only does he sell heroin, but he doesn't like to leave any loose ends...which means he's more than happy to kill anyone...even his own clients or a cop! The problem is that the detective investigating doesn't realize that his own fiancee is one of the killer's clients. To make it worse, her father is a police lieutenant! Can the cops manage to notice that their lead to the killer's identity is right there in front of them?!

While the film is very realistic in depicting drug abuse, it's not a film noir movie. It focuses more on realism as opposed to sensationalism. Well worth seeing and never dull.

By the way, this film is John Astin's movie debut. He is only briefly seen near the beginning of the picture and barely says anything. I guess they had no idea he'd one day be a star.

United Artists dumped this lousy movie, understandably since it lacks any entertainment value. As the title suggests, there was exploitation movie material to be mined here, but one-shot movie director Gene Milford (whose day job was film editing) delivered a deadly dull stinker with a no-name cast.

Writing credits are strictly A-list: screenplay by Harold Robbins early in his career, from an Ed McBain novel by Evan Hunter. But they have no feel for the genre. It plays like a reject episode of TV's "Naked City" series, with on-location photography plus chintzy studio interiors.

Cops are played by Robert Lansing and John Astin, also having career off-days. Heroine (who is hooked on perhaps heroin?) Kathy Carlyle is good looking but an instant flop -her only other movie was a routine Charles Bronson war picture.

The title character played by Felice Orlandi is a bore -instantly one-note evil. Addiction then and now is a surefire formula for drama, but Robbins, unlike his future amazing success with so many hit novels like "The Carpetbaggers", comes up with nothing but dullness.